Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Running Lisp in Production (2015)

tech.grammarly.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 62 posts

Re: Running Lisp in Production (2015)

#51

Post by hhas01 »

Throw_Away_4825 wrote: post #39
AlexMoffat wrote: post #2

“but we value choice and freedom over rules and processes.” Who could argue with that? It can sound pretty defensive though, like we know we have a bunch of nearly random stuff that few people can really understand and manage but, hey, freedom. Lisp has always been interesting and there’s always one or two companies in any time interval that are successful, and wildly so, using it. It could also be as much skill, gre…

There are more companies being more successful using PHP.

And no doubt many more companies being more unsuccessful using PHP too.

If you really must go comparing apples to pears, a marginally less worthless metric might be the percentage of each that has worms in.

Re: Running Lisp in Production (2015)

#52

Post by hhas01 »

reaperducer wrote: post #17
wglb wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lispwork page http://www.lispworks.com/success-stories/ has some that are specific to lispworks. Some also (with possible overlap) at https://lisp-lang.org/success/ . Allegro Common Lisp success stories: https://franz.com/success/ . ITA (now part of Google) https://www.itasoftware.com/

Thanks for the lists. Aside from ITA and Northwestern University, most of those were new to me. I was kinda hoping for some big commonly-known brands. I'm trying to convince my boss to let me learn Lisp on company time.

In order to better solve what business problem, exactly?

If I was your boss, I’d demand to know your projected ROI calculations up-front too. That includes the near-term risks and costs of change management when phasing in your new technologies and practices, and long-term business continuity implications after you’ve personally buggered off to pastures new.

Re: Running Lisp in Production (2015)

#53

Post by Smithalicious »

Throw_Away_4825 wrote: post #37
gilesgate wrote: post #6

Previous discussions from last year: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16860646 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16679963 (Common) Lisp usually gets more use than exposure, so it's nice to see large-scale Lisp success stories. Makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside, as it's one of my two favourite languages (the other one being, of course , C). Edit: APL is a close third, but let's be realistic.

>(Common) Lisp usually gets more use than exposure What? It gets exposure on the Internet all the time, while seemingly nearly no one uses it in production. Edit: Just look at the end of [1]. They have exactly three examples. Edit 2: They have more example in [2], but it is still pretty little. [1] https://lisp-lang.org/ [2] https://lisp-lang.org/success/

This is getting downvoted and I don't see why. CL is easily in the top 10 programming languages I see mentioned on HN and it also comes up regularly outside of HN, yet the amount of people actually using it in production seems miniscule.

Re: Running Lisp in Production (2015)

#54

Post by Throw_Away_7435 »

Smithalicious wrote: post #53
Throw_Away_4825 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>(Common) Lisp usually gets more use than exposure What? It gets exposure on the Internet all the time, while seemingly nearly no one uses it in production. Edit: Just look at the end of [1]. They have exactly three examples. Edit 2: They have more example in [2], but it is still pretty little. [1] https://lisp-lang.org/ [2] https://lisp-lang.org/success/

This is getting downvoted and I don't see why. CL is easily in the top 10 programming languages I see mentioned on HN and it also comes up regularly outside of HN, yet the amount of people actually using it in production seems miniscule.

Because HN is full of Lisp zealots. (Which may be partially because Paul Graham is also a Lisp zealot.) And there is of course also a selection of people who click on certain threads.

Many other platforms are similar in that regard, but from HN I would normally except better.

(I am the same person as grand-parent with a different account, btw.)

Re: Running Lisp in Production (2015)

#55

Post by ebiester »

RodgerTheGreat wrote: post #8

Grammarly is essentially an opt-in keylogger for your browser. To put it generously, it is hilariously insecure by design. Furthermore, I don't believe that most of their users understand that the plugin "phones home" continuously to function. Hey, at least the developers get to tinker with fun languages while spying on people!

While true, I believe the whole intent is to use machine learning on real text to improve the customer's experience. For the customer, this is a feature rather than the bug. It is not how I would prefer to interface with grammar checking, mind you, but I think they have been transparent.

Re: Running Lisp in Production (2015)

#56

Post by tomhoward »

Throw_Away_7435 wrote: post #54
Smithalicious wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is getting downvoted and I don't see why. CL is easily in the top 10 programming languages I see mentioned on HN and it also comes up regularly outside of HN, yet the amount of people actually using it in production seems miniscule.

Because HN is full of Lisp zealots. (Which may be partially because Paul Graham is also a Lisp zealot.) And there is of course also a selection of people who click on certain threads. Many other platforms are similar in that regard, but from HN I would normally except better. (I am the same person as grand-parent with a different account, btw.)

HN being one of the few places online where Lisp enthusiasts can find new Lisp-related content and discuss it with other enthusiasts is very different from HN being "full of Lisp zealots" They're still very much in the minority here.

Re: Running Lisp in Production (2015)

#57

Post by bjoli »

Exuma wrote: post #21

This sounds kind of like an absolutely miserable experience. Can someone point out why a company would choose lisp over some other language which is just as fast performance wise?

Because languages with the same speed are generally a lot less flexible. If you have access to allegro CL or LispWorks and you and your team know CL you must have some very good reasons not to use it.

SBCL (the implementation they use) was(is?) known to have a pretty bad GC situation.

Re: Running Lisp in Production (2015)

#58

Post by kristianp »

jammygit wrote: post #47
gilesgate wrote: post #6

Previous discussions from last year: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16860646 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16679963 (Common) Lisp usually gets more use than exposure, so it's nice to see large-scale Lisp success stories. Makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside, as it's one of my two favourite languages (the other one being, of course , C). Edit: APL is a close third, but let's be realistic.

I did not realize common lisp was still in use and was therefore planning on learning Clojure instead. Which is better to learn then?

I would imagine Clojure has more use than Lisp. It's a valid question which is better to learn, not one I'm qualified to answer, though. All I would say is that the Clojure community seems more active, and less prickly than the Lisp one.

Re: Running Lisp in Production (2015)

#60

Post by gilesgate »

billsix wrote: post #49
jammygit wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did not realize common lisp was still in use and was therefore planning on learning Clojure instead. Which is better to learn then?

http://www.paulgraham.com/onlisp.html

"On Lisp" is a good book but perhaps too advanced for an introduction, whereas his "ANSI Common Lisp"[0] is better suited to the purpose. Barski's "Land of Lisp" has also received positive feedback.[1]

I'd be interested to see what others consider a suitable general learning path for Lisp.

[0] http://www.paulgraham.com/acl.html

[1] http://shop.oreilly.com/product/9781593272814.do

Post reply on HN